HB 5206
HB 5206
For this weekly feature, we profile a noteworthy bill that is going through the legislative process. The bill may relate directly to TCDD’s Public Policy Priorities or another disability-related issue.
Bill: House Bill (HB) 5206, relating to penalties for falsely representing that an animal is a service animal.
Bill author: Rep. Vikki Goodwin, House District 47 (Austin)
Share this bill
We’ve created a Bill of the Week one-pager (PDF) for HB 5206. This is a simplified explanation of the bill that you can share with your representative and personal network.
Background
The Human Resources Code defines both “assistance animal” and “service animal” to mean a “canine that is specially trained or equipped to help a person with a disability and that is used by a person with a disability.” The statute does not mention emotional support animals. There is great confusion regarding what is and is not protected under the law for these types of animals. This makes it difficult to identify and enforce violations of those laws. It is complicated even more by owners who falsely represent their untrained animals as service animals.
What does the bill do?
HB 5206 would update the offense of “improper use of assistance animals” by changing it to “false representation of animals as service animals.” The maximum monetary penalty for the offense would be increased to $1,000 from the current $300.
The bill would amend the Human Resources Code to define “emotional support animal” as “any animal that provides emotional support alleviating one or more symptoms or effects of a person’s disability.”
HB 5206 would require businesses that sell or provide items for pets or emotional support animals to provide written notice to customers in 14-point bold type stating:
- these items do not entitle the owner to the rights and privileges of an assistance or service animal; and
- intentionally or knowingly representing an animal as an assistance or service animal when that animal is not specially trained to assist a person with a disability is a misdemeanor.
Failure to provide this written notice would also be a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $2,500.
The bill would clarify that habitual abuse or neglect of a service animal can result in the animal’s seizure. This protection already exists for assistance animals. HB 5206 would also establish guidelines for health care practitioners to follow when providing recommendations for an emotional support animal. A recommendation could not be provided without meeting all of the following criteria:
- Establishing a patient-provider relationship with the patient prior to providing the recommendation.
- Completing a clinical evaluation of the patient regarding the need for an emotional support animal.
- Providing a verbal or written notice to the individual that knowingly and fraudulently representing oneself to be the owner of any animal licensed as, to be qualified as, or identified as, an assistance or service animal is a misdemeanor violation.
Health care practitioners that fail to comply would be subject to investigation and disciplinary proceedings, including warnings, probation, or suspension by their licensing agency. A pattern of abuse could result in revocation of the practitioner’s license and even referral of the case to a prosecuting attorney.
The bill stipulates that its provisions are not meant to restrict or change existing federal and state laws related to a person’s rights for reasonable accommodation and equal access to housing. If passed, HB 5206 would take effect Sept. 1, 2023.
Statement from Rep. Vikki Goodwin, bill author:
“HB 5206 should help restore the reputation that trained service dogs have earned and limit negative interactions that service dogs experience.”
Where is the bill in the process?
On April 11, 2023, HB 5206 received a public hearing before the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and was left pending. This means that the committee did not vote on the bill and it could be considered again at a future committee meeting. You can watch the discussion on the bill here, beginning at the 21:00 mark.
Who supports the bill and why?
The following comments were provided at the April 11 hearing on HB 5206:
- Service Dogs Inc.: Ada Brown, a representative of Service Dogs Inc. who lives with deafness, testified in support of the bill. She indicated that she is a deaf support specialist, a disability integration specialist, and an ADA law consultant. Brown described the threat that emotional support animals, which are generally untrained, can pose to service animals in public places. She stated that they often bark or growl at, distract, and even attack working dogs. Brown stressed that this puts her own livelihood at risk, noting, “If [my hearing dog] gets hurt, I’m out of commission. I can’t hear fire trucks or alarms. I can’t hear my children call my name. I hear nothing without hearing aids.” Brown also discussed the seeming ease with which one can acquire an emotional support animal certification letter. To test the process, she applied online for certification letters from a variety of services. Within a very short time, and with apparently minimal vetting, she received letters from each of them.
- Self-Advocate: Pat Pound, a former state employee who worked primarily in blindness rehabilitation and disability-oriented positions, provided remarks in favor of the bill. She detailed her background as a former executive director of the Governor’s Committee on People with Disabilities (GCPD) and former appointee to the National Council on Disability. Pound shared her concern over “fake service dogs,” and described the matter as a “safety and civil rights issue.”
- Self-Advocate: Steve Elliot, who identified himself as a Texan with a disability, a guide dog handler, and a lifelong disability lawyer, testified in support of the bill. He noted the widespread availability of items to dress a pet as a service animal. “And while this may seem harmless on the surface,” Elliot said, “when those pets are put in situations they are not trained for, they interfere with the rights of people with disabilities to access the community, to feel freedom, to leave their house at any time, [or] to go to restaurants.”
- Canine Companions: John Cunningham, a volunteer puppy raiser for Canine Companions, spoke in favor of the bill. Cunningham explained the lengthy training that service dogs go through to gain socialization skills. He noted that there has been “a great increase in untrained dogs that are wearing the [service animal] vest and setting the bar low” for dogs with more than adequate training. Cunningham emphasized that this is due to people not seeing the true intention of service animals, but rather just a title they can use so their pet can get into places only service animals are allowed to be. “Seeing all of these untrained animals masquerading … just changes the public’s view. So, they see a dog in a vest and they no longer think to themselves this is something that’s important, [or] this is something that is helping someone. They think, ‘Oh, I also want to be able to take my puppy with me on a plane.’”
The following groups also registered their support for HB 5206 but provided no testimony: Coalition of Texans with Disabilities and the City of Houston Mayor’s Office.
Who opposes the bill and why?
No one registered their opposition to HB 5206.
Additional testimony
The following comments were provided on HB 5206 at the April 11 hearing:
- Disability Rights Texas: Jeff Miller, policy specialist for Disability Rights Texas (DRTx), testified on the bill. He noted his organization’s work on the issue and appreciation for what the bill is trying to do. However, he expressed concern that the bill was not fully addressing the fundamental confusion over “who has what rights in what settings” regarding support and service animals. To reach a solution, Miller indicated that DRTx is working with the bill author’s office and other stakeholders to bolster the bill’s language as it moves through the legislative process.
Additional information
In 2018, GCPD established a workgroup to gather information and develop solutions to address concerns surrounding service animals. The workgroup’s report (PDF, 16 pages, 560 KB) formed the basis of GCPD’s recommendations on service animals that were included in the committee’s 2024-25 Recommendations to the 88th Texas Legislature (PDF, 75 pages, 674 KB). GCPD’s guidance on service animals included the following recommendations:
- Recommendation 1.4: Increase the penalty of fraudulent representation of service or assistance animals and include additional penalty options such as community service and taking a court-ordered disability public awareness class.
- Recommendation 1.6: Adopt criteria to reduce fraud for healthcare practitioners issuing a letter for an emotional support animal.
- Recommendation 1.7: Require that a person or business that sells or provides a certificate, identification, tag, vest, leash, or harness for an emotional support animal must provide a written notice to the buyer or recipient on applicable laws and penalties for misrepresenting the animal as a service animal.
How much will the bill cost?
The Legislative Budget Board found HB 5206 would not increase the state budget.
Is there a Senate companion to the bill?
There is no Senate companion to HB 5206.
Stay informed
For the latest information about where HB 5206 is in the process, follow the bill on the Texas Legislature Online. To receive future legislative updates from TCDD, follow us on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, or Instagram.
Bill of the Week Updates
Here is an update on previous TCDD Bills of the Week for the 88th legislative session.
The following bills were recently passed out of the House and now head to the Senate:
